Seemingly contradicting proof for Euler's Totient Function

145 Views Asked by At

Euler's Totient function has the following property: $$ \phi(p^\alpha) = p^\alpha - p^{\alpha - 1} $$

for prime p and $ \alpha \geqslant 1 $

However the following proof demonstrates that$ \phi(n) = \frac{n}{2}$ iff $n = 2^k$ for some $ k \geqslant 1 $

Let $ n = 2^km$ where m is odd. Then $\phi(n) = 2^{k-1}\phi(m)$ which equals $\frac{n}{2}$ only if $\phi(m) = m$ that is $m = 1$ So $n = 2^k$

I have two questions, first of all, why does $\phi(n) = 2^{k-1}\phi(m)$? How is this conclusion reached in the proof?

And secondly why does this not contradict the property? Given that 2 is a prime, shouldn't the property dictate that $\phi(2^k) = 2^k - 2^{k-1}$

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

If

$$n=2^k\implies \frac n2=2^{k-1}=2^k-2^{k-1}\;\ldots$$

so indeed $\;\phi(n)=\cfrac n2\;$ yet no contradiction exists.